California sets example for nation

Carolyn Lochhead and David R. Baker

Published 11:25 pm, Monday, June 2, 2014

Washington -- California and other states that have acted to cut greenhouse-gas pollution will be models for the rest of the country when it comes to adopting caps on power-plant emissions that fuel global warming, state officials and environmentalists said Monday.

But while experts said the California example could be transplanted elsewhere, President Barack Obama's proposed rule to limit emissions and cement his legacy on climate change encountered resistance from coal-state interests, signaling that the unprecedented proposal is far from a settled issue.

The administration's proposed rule lets states decide how to meet the caps, tailored in ways that will mean lower costs to California and others that have taken steps to limit carbon pollution. States that rely on coal, a major source of carbon-dioxide emissions, to generate electricity are likely to face a costlier climb to meet the new targets.

The proposal sets off a process in which every state will determine how to meet targets set by the Environmental Protection Agency.

By pioneering a carbon pollution trading system in 2012, California "has created a gigantic and important proof case that reducing greenhouse gas emissions and having an economy grow can be done simultaneously," said Cathy Zoi, former White House chief of staff on environmental policy in the Clinton administration and now a consulting professor at Stanford University.

"We've already figured out to access renewables," such as solar and wind power, Zoi said. "We use lots of natural gas. Our energy-efficiency programs here in California are world best-practice. So the program that we have here is setting the national standard for what can be done."

The new targets call for a 30 percent reduction from 2005 levels in carbon emissions from power plants by 2030. Electricity generation is the largest source of carbon pollution, accounting for 40 percent of U.S. emissions.

The rule faces legal challenges by the coal industry and a legislative assault by Republicans in Congress.

"Once we have a clear target to meet, we typically meet it and we find the best ways to do it," Obama said.

The proposal comes just five months before midterm elections that could cost Democrats control of the Senate. The party's majority depends on holding onto seats in a handful of fossil fuel-rich, politically up-for-grab states such as Louisiana, Alaska, Montana and West Virginia.

After legislation to limit carbon emissions died in Obama's first term, helping topple Democrat Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco from the House speakership, Democrats went silent on the issue.

Now they are gambling that they can hold the Senate in November and that by the 2016 presidential election year, Republicans who deny climate change will be the ones paying a price.

Obama, for his part, has made it clear that he sees tackling climate change as one of the most important goals of his presidency. The new rule is the biggest step any U.S. president has ever taken on the issue.

No state has taken more aggressive action to fight climate change than California.

The state has set limits on greenhouse gas emissions and forces companies to buy permits to emit carbon dioxide into the air. California requires oil companies to cut the "carbon intensity" of the fuels they sell in the state.

Regulations adopted in 2007 effectively block utility companies in the state from buying electricity from coal-fired power plants. And under state law, utilities must get 33 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by the end of 2020.

As a result, California is well on its way toward meeting the EPA's proposed standards, analysts say. The state's current climate-change programs should cut emissions from power plants and utilities 25 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, according to the California Air Resources Board.

"What these rules do, in a way, is build off what we've been doing since the 1970s, moving away from coal, pushing on efficiency and renewables," said Robert Weisenmiller, chairman of the California Energy Commission. "This is going to push forward the programs California is known for and make them more national in scope."

Weisenmiller said the governor and the Legislature would probably set a 2030 target calling for deeper cuts than the EPA would require.

"I would anticipate it would be more aggressive than this target," he said.

California's greenhouse gas emissions actually rose 1.8 percent in 2012, the most recent year for which data are available. The increase came as a result of the drought, which cut the output of hydroelectric dams, and the closure of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in San Diego County. Even so, the state's 2012 greenhouse gas emissions were 5.4 percent below their levels in 2005.

California and other states that are already limiting carbon-dioxide emissions could benefit under Obama's plan if other states join their cap-and-trade programs. The permits are traded on markets that set a price on carbon, creating an incentive to find the cheapest way to cut emissions.

More than a dozen Northeastern states created a similar emissions trading system. But until now, states were acting alone, limiting the scope of their emissions markets and concentrating costs among themselves.

"The verdict has come in pretty quickly that these are worthwhile programs," Walker said. "California has already been a hotspot of visits from other states and countries who want to learn as much as they can about what we're doing here."